jcampionehttps://jcampione.wordpress.com
Just another WordPress.com siteTue, 26 Sep 2017 21:37:15 +0000enhourly1http://wordpress.com/https://s2.wp.com/i/buttonw-com.pngjcampionehttps://jcampione.wordpress.com
Final Post: Chicken Little and the Disney-Pixar Relationshiphttps://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/05/08/final-post-chicken-little-and-the-disney-pixar-relationship/
https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/05/08/final-post-chicken-little-and-the-disney-pixar-relationship/#respondTue, 08 May 2012 07:51:55 +0000http://jcampione.wordpress.com/?p=337]]>Trying to stay on top of my Disney history, I figured it was high time that I took a look at Chicken Little, Disney’s sometimes forgotten first foray into the world of exclusively CGI animation.

The story of a chicken who thinks that the sky is falling is a fun little movie, and honestly, I thought it was decently entertaining. The voice acting was really good, and really, the animation was fairly impressive, using all sorts of new technology for Disney animators to achieve a full length CGI feature. Clearly Disney animation had come a long way from the hand drawn cels of Snow White nearly 68 years prior.

The theatrical poster for the movie. Simple, yet effective

One of the biggest knocks on the film, and the reason why it never really was considered a classic despite it’s strong performance at the box office, was the weak storyline. Honestly, I can see where the critique comes in, and what frustrated me was that the movie had a lot of good elements going for it.

For one, I actually liked the character of Chicken Little and I was enjoying the dynamic between him and his father, who Chicken Little believes doesn’t believe in him. The story of Chicken Little trying to earn his Dad’s love is apparent, but not fully fleshed out, and that I thought was a miss on the part of the studio. I understand that the whole “sky is falling” storyline needed to take center stage, but I can’t help but feel that there was a way to look at both storylines while doing both due justice. There was also a quick and forced love angle between Chicken Little and his friend Abbey Mallard that I could of done without, but hey, that’s just me.

The other odd thing, though not necessarily a bad thing, was how modern the movie seemed. When’s the last time you saw cell phones in a Disney movie? It almost seemed out of place, with so many of Disney’s films taking place “Once upon a time.”

Look at that track list. Not an original song to be found, which is a true rarity for Disney movies

There was also an unusual amount of cultural references and one of the most unique soundtracks you will ever find on a Disney movie. This movie clearly showed that gone were the days of the Disney musical and the dramatic, original scores in favor of the more modern pop songs and covers sung by the characters. Instead of getting “Hakuna Matata” and “A Whole New World,” we were treated to renditions of “I Will Survive” and “Don’t Go Breaking My Heart.” Like I said, it wasn’t bad, so much as very different, and for my money, I’m still a fan of the original music. I don’t know, it just feels more like Disney that way.

This movie was extremely important for Disney, particularly in its relations with Pixar. With the Disney-Pixar deal expiring after 2006′s Cars, this movie helped decide who would have the leverage in negotiations between the two companies. If it did well, Disney could argue that they could do CGI just as well as Pixar. If it bombed, Pixar could argue that Disney needed them to produce quality CGI films.

The man, the myth, the legend John Lasseter is the man behind some of Disney and Pixar’s most famous movies and characters

Chicken Little‘s modest success led to the two sides agreeing that they were better off with each other than without, causing Disney’s huge acquisition of Pixar in late 2006. The film also helped change the face of Disney’s creative decisions and their creative team in general.

John Lasseter, the mastermind of many of Pixar’s greatest hits, was placed as the chief creative officer for both Pixar and Walt Disney Animated Studios, a position which he still holds today. Lasseter’s influence was felt immediately for Disney, as he completely retooled an upcoming feature Meet the Robinsons, which met favorable critical reviews and is a personal favorite of mine.

The acquisition of Pixar also allowed Disney to once again return to traditionally animating feature films. Although not every movie since has been traditionally animated, such as Tangled, with Disney no longer needing to compete with Pixar for creative and economic leverage, they were allowed to return to some traditional means for making animated films, which enabled many formerly laid off employees to return to Disney and was welcome news for those who grew up watching Disney’s traditionally animated films.

Overall, Chicken Little is definitely an important film in the Disney canon for a host of reasons, and certainly has a different feel from any Disney movie that preceded it. I thought it was an enjoyable little movie that actually had me laughing here and there, but what did you think?

]]>https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/05/08/my-comments-updated-48-24/feed/0jcampionPost #12: Aquamaniahttps://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/05/01/post-12-aquamania/
https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/05/01/post-12-aquamania/#respondTue, 01 May 2012 17:25:47 +0000http://jcampione.wordpress.com/?p=273]]>Seeing as I had so much fun looking at a Disney short last week, I figured I’d do another one this week.

This week I’m looking at Aquamania, a 1961 short featuring another one of Disney’s main characters, Goofy.

When I was little, I remember that some of my favorite cartoons were the Goofy documentaries. Usually they entail a voiceover explaining how to do something, such as play tennis or baseball, or just commenting on his observations of Goofy playing basketball or camping, while Goofy attempted, and usually comically failed, to do the things the short was based around.

I don’t know why, but these shorts always stuck with me, and I find myself watching classics like Double Dribble and The Olympic Champ. This short was a nice blend of all the different types of Goofy cartoons, and mixed the three major topics that Goofy shorts were usually about; sports, being a father, and being a documentary subject.

The film shows Goofy, or “Mr. X” as he is called, and his “aquamania,” or obsession with boats. Goofy buys a boat and takes his son out to the lake to teach him how to do all sorts of things, including water skiing. Naturally, Goofy ends up reluctantly becoming part of a water skiing race, and after a lot of slapstick, ends up winning the race.

A few of my observations were that the short almost felt like it was two stories in one. At first, it felt like it was going to talk about Goofy’s obsession with boats and how it took over is life, but then it shifted and primarily became about the water skiing race and the comedy that came from that.

Also, how about seeing this version of Goofy’s son? For us 90’s kids who grew up with Goof Troop and A Goofy Movie, we all know that Goofy’s son is Max. I have no idea who this kid is, but it was interesting seeing this first incarnation of Max.

I also liked seeing this older version of Goofy. He still was similar and recognizable based on how he looks and acts today, but I don’t know, he seemed less goofy to me in this older incarnation, if that makes any sense.

As for the animation, I love it. I thought it was interesting seeing this opening, with a title sequence and a “Walt Disney Presents” as opposed to just the picture of Goofy that the audience had become accustomed to.

This short is also significant, as it again was nominated for Best Animated Short Film in 1962, as well as receiving the distinction of being the last Goofy animated short of the Golden Age of Disney animation.

Once again, this is a fun short with a classic character who is beloved by a lot of people, and with it only being eigt minutes, there’s no reason not to check it out.

]]>https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/05/01/post-12-aquamania/feed/0jcampionPost #11: Donald’s Crimehttps://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/26/post-11-donalds-crime/
https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/26/post-11-donalds-crime/#commentsThu, 26 Apr 2012 14:38:31 +0000http://jcampione.wordpress.com/?p=261]]>So I decided that while watching Disney movies is great, to truly get a sense of all things Disney, I need to look at some of their short films too.

As I talked about in my look at Disney eras, the mid 1940s to late 1950s were marked by many short films, due in part to many animators fighting overseas in World War II and part to financial troubles of the company. As we looked at in class, many of the short films in the early 1940s were war propaganda films.

Donald’s Crime was made in 1945 and is a parody on film noir, which was starting to gain popularity at the time after films such as The Maltese Falcon (1941) and Double Indemnity (1944).

The short follows Donald Duck who is preparing for his big date with Daisy, but realizes that he doesn’t have any money. This causes him to steal $1.25 from his nephews Huey, Dewey, and Louie, but afterwards he feels terrible about it, and sees himself as a gangster on the run from the law.

The animation on this is real fun, particularly when Donald goes “on the run.” Seeing him in a prototypical gangster outfit and going through typical Donald Duck physical humor is just fun for me, being a fan of film noir and a huge Donald Duck fan.

This short is particularly entertaining for people who have watched classical film noir, because it does make fun of the typical conventions of the genre, again, in the scenes after Donald’s date with Daisy. For example, when Donald is trying to hideout on the roof and goes to the edge to look at another far off building and the narrator tells him “Jump! All gangsters have to do that.”

The short is significant in Disney lore for being nominated for Best Animated Feature in 1946 (it lost to Quiet Please, a classic Tom and Jerry short) as well as being the first time that we hear Daisy’s true voice. As for me, I enjoyed the short immensely, and it has one of my new favorite lines of all time, “I’m financially embarrassed.” Trust me, I’ll use that one at some point in the near future.

Below is the short, and if you have 8 minutes to spare somewhere, I’d give it a watch. It really is a classic.

]]>https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/26/post-11-donalds-crime/feed/9jcampionPost #10: Chicken Little – Disney’s First Full Attempt at CGIhttps://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/post-10-chicken-little-disneys-first-full-attempt-at-cgi/
https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/post-10-chicken-little-disneys-first-full-attempt-at-cgi/#commentsThu, 12 Apr 2012 14:45:11 +0000http://jcampione.wordpress.com/?p=247]]>Trying to stay on top of my Disney history, I figured it was high time that I took a look at Chicken Little, Disney’s sometimes forgotten first foray into the world of exclusively CGI animation.

The story of a chicken who thinks that the sky is falling is a fun little movie, and honestly, I thought it was decently entertaining. The voice acting was really good, and really, the animation was fairly impressive, using all sorts of new technology for Disney animators to achieve a full length CGI feature. Clearly Disney animation had come a long way from the hand drawn cels of Snow White nearly 68 years prior.

One of the biggest knocks on the film, and the reason why it never really was considered a classic despite it’s strong performance at the box office was the weak storyline. Honestly, I can see where the critique comes in, and what frustrated me was that the movie had a lot of good elements going for it.

For one, I actually liked the character of Chicken Little and I was enjoying the dynamic between him and his father, who Chicken Little believes doesn’t believe in him. The story of Chicken Little trying to earn his Dad’s love is apparent, but not fully fleshed out, and that I thought was a miss on the part of the studio. I understand that the whole “sky is falling” storyline needed to take center stage, but I can’t help but feel that there was a way to look at both storylines while doing both due justice. There was also a quick and forced love angle between Chicken Little and his friend Abbey Mallard that I could of done without, but hey, that’s just me.

The other odd thing, though not necessarily a bad thing, was how modern the movie seemed. When’s the last time you saw cell phones in a Disney movie? It almost seemed out of place, with so many of Disney’s films taking place “Once upon a time.”

There was also an unusual amount of cultural references and one of the most unique soundtracks you will ever find on a Disney movie. This movie clearly showed that gone were the days of the Disney musical and the dramatic, original scores in favor of the more modern pop songs and covers sung by the characters. Instead of getting “Hakuna Matata” and “A Whole New World,” we were treated to renditions of “I Will Survive” and “Don’t Go Breaking My Heart.” Like I said, it wasn’t bad, so much as very different, and for my money, I’m still a fan of the original music. I don’t know, it just feels more like Disney that way.

This movie was extremely important for Disney, particularly in its relations with Pixar. With the Disney-Pixar deal expiring after 2006’s Cars, this movie helped decide who would have the leverage in negotiations between the two companies. If it did well, Disney could argue that they could do CGI just as well as Pixar. If it bombed, Pixar could argue that Disney needed them to produce quality CGI films.

Chicken Little‘s modest success led to the two sides agreeing that they were better off with each other than without, causing Disney’s huge acquisition of Pixar in late 2006.

Overall, Chicken Little is definitely an important film in the Disney canon for a host of reasons, and certainly has a different feel from any Disney movie that preceded it. I thought it was an enjoyable little movie that actually had me laughing here and there, but what did you think?

]]>https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/post-10-chicken-little-disneys-first-full-attempt-at-cgi/feed/10jcampionPost #9: An “Incredible” Triumph for Pixarhttps://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/post-9-an-incredible-triumph-for-pixar-11-2/
https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/post-9-an-incredible-triumph-for-pixar-11-2/#commentsThu, 12 Apr 2012 14:28:39 +0000http://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/post-9-an-incredible-triumph-for-pixar-11/]]>So the other day, I found myself watching The Incredibles from Pixar, and I gotta say, after watching it through, doing some research on it, and listening to Brad Bird, the director, I’m really very impressed, and for my money, TheIncredibles may have been one of, if not the, most important films that has come out of Pixar.

Up until 2004, Pixar had been a juggernaut. Already with two popular and successful Toy Story movies as well as the wildly successful Finding Nemo, it truly began to feel like Pixar could not miss. A big fear for the chief creative officer at Pixar, John Lasseter, was that the animators and higher ups at Pixar would become complacent with this success.

Enter Brad Bird.

Basically, Bird had been trying to pitch his movie about a family of superheroes for a number of years, before finally, Pixar picked it up. The movie was going to be technically challenging, almost to the point of impossibility, which was what scared most animators and why I think it is so impressive. Through this point, Pixar had not really touched humans, aside from the occasional views of a glassy looking Andy in the Toy Story movies.

Due to this, new systems had to be created in order to achieve making a convincing looking human. Beyond that, there were over 90 different locations and effects ranging from wind weight, and water for animators to contend with.

All of that made for a visually stunning movie, and for my money, one of Pixar’s biggest triumphs. The movie did spectacular at the box office, and the drive to animate humans as well as go for a children’s movie with a complex storyline ended up paying major dividends down the road for Pixar.

The story of The Incredibles is actually really heavy. There’s aspects of how past decisions can affect the future, how people react to their midlife crisis, and even a subtle, albeit strong, look at trust issues within marriage. Pixar’s decision to not just pander to children and give an interesting and mature storyline helped make this movie accessible to all different age ranges, and opened the doors for future features to have emotionally driven mature storylines as well, particularly Up, which was universally acclaimed for its use of emotion.

Without Pixar refusing to rest on its laurels and just continue to make buddy films featuring bugs, toys, monsters, or whatever else they could find, they decided to go big for a technical and theatrical challenge, and it not only paid off in 2004, it is still paying off in 2012.

]]>https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/post-9-an-incredible-triumph-for-pixar-11-2/feed/6jcampionMy Animationhttps://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/my-animation/
https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/my-animation/#commentsTue, 10 Apr 2012 17:33:59 +0000http://jcampione.wordpress.com/?p=221]]>Here is a link to my animation: http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/13275233/history-of-animation]]>https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/my-animation/feed/1jcampionPost #8: The Accuracy of Disney Movieshttps://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/03/the-accuracy-of-disney-movies/
https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/03/the-accuracy-of-disney-movies/#commentsTue, 03 Apr 2012 18:00:23 +0000http://jcampione.wordpress.com/?p=209]]>One of the topics that became heavily debated in the comment section of my Hercules post was the historical accuracy of Disney movies. It seemed like a lot of people understood why the movies strayed from their source material so much, but there was also the argument against such wide deviations.

For me, I understand both sides of the arguments, yet I’m of the theory that the movies don’t have to be word for word to the original source material. We have to remember, these movies are still intended for a children’s audience, and a lot of the source material is rather dark, and not exactly kid friendly.

These movies try to convey a simple moral for children, as opposed to the set of complex ideas and statements like full length novels that some movies are based off of try to convey. Even the Grimm Fairy Tales, which many of the Disney films are based off of, give a moral through dark means. These Disney movies try to convey those same messages, but do it in a much more bright, colorful, kid friendly way.

Even further than that, as I got older, the Disney movies prompted me to look up these stories and novels on my own, and read the originals and make my own assumptions on them. I never would have read The Fox and the Hound, for instance, but because I loved the movie so much, I looked up the book and read it. The same goes for a host of Grimm Fairy Tales, like Snow White and The Little Mermaid.

Now, the one movie that I have some issue with the blatant lack of reality is Pocahontas, and that’s only because these were real life people who’s story was changed. Even there, I understand why things were done as they were, but just the thought of blatantly changing history didn’t sit as well with me.

So overall, I am ok with Disney’s deviations from their source material, purely because the movies still convey the same morals and actually expose these great stories to a wider, younger audience. Of course, that’s just my opinion. What do you guys think?

]]>https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/04/03/the-accuracy-of-disney-movies/feed/5jcampionPost #7: Analyzing Home on the Rangehttps://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/post-7-analyzing-home-on-the-range/
https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/post-7-analyzing-home-on-the-range/#commentsTue, 27 Mar 2012 14:51:24 +0000http://jcampione.wordpress.com/?p=206]]>For those of you who have read and looked at my blog, you’ve learned a few things about me. I’m a bit of a Disney fanatic and I love just about everything Disney.

Well, I thought I did. As I’ve moved along and started to watch some of the more modern Disney animated features, I have found the occasional movie that just didn’t sit right with me. Last week, I watched Home on the Range for the first time, and let’s just say it’s not my favorite Disney movie.

Before I get into the reasons that I thought made it weak, let me give it some props. The movie was very colorful, the animation was crisp, and it had it’s fun moments in it. It definitely was entertaining enough for a younger audience, which at the end of the day, is the main audience.

But now for the things that I thought were problematic about the film. The first thing that was blatantly apparent was just how fast paced the movie moved, but it wasn’t in a good way. It felt like everything was being rushed, and for the first hour or so of the movie, I was just dying for the plot to slow down and bit.

The problem with this quick pace of the movie was that it didn’t allow anything to really develop. There was about 30 seconds of exposition, and within it felt like 10 minutes we were into the heart of the plot. The problem didn’t have enough of a chance to sink in to the viewer as to why it was important, and by barely meeting the characters, it’s hard for me to care that their farm is being repossessed.

Speaking of the characters, they were very bland and forgettable. Part of that was because the pacing was so fast that we never really got to meet them, but part of that was because how simple they were. With the cows, you had the fat one, the British one with the hat, and the dumb one. That’s about as far as their characters go.

The only character who had any memorability factor was the horse, Buck, played by Cuba Gooding Jr. I think I liked him so much because his cocky character was fun, but because he also had a legitimate character change over the course of the movie and had reasoning for everything that he did. The same couldn’t always be said for our main characters, and again, I just found myself not caring about them as much as I should have.

The music was also surprisingly dull and forgettable for a Disney movie. Obviously anything compared to the classic Disney songs of the 90’s is going to fall short, but these songs were just bland, and didn’t really add any life or personality to the film.

Part of the issues I think lied in the run time. The movie ran only 76 minutes, as opposed to say the 84 minutes that Beauty and the Beast ran. Eight minutes doesn’t sound like much, bit I truly think that had the movie used eight more minutes in the beginning to introduce plot and characters more fully, the movie would have been overall better. Not great, mind you, but better.

You’ll notice that I really haven’t talked much about character names or the plot, and that’s because overall, this movie was just forgettable to me. Originally, this was supposed to be Disney’s last traditionally animated movie, and I’m really glad that didn’t end up being the case, because it would have been an extremely lackluster way for traditional animation to go.

In the end, I wouldn’t exactly recommend this movie, but if you want to see how a Disney movie can miss the mark and maybe see a movie that makes you appreciate the classics that much more, then why not, go give it a watch.

]]>https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/post-7-analyzing-home-on-the-range/feed/2jcampionMidterm Post: Looking at the Disney Erashttps://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/03/21/midterm-post-looking-at-the-disney-eras/
https://jcampione.wordpress.com/2012/03/21/midterm-post-looking-at-the-disney-eras/#respondWed, 21 Mar 2012 01:21:52 +0000http://jcampione.wordpress.com/?p=197]]>Disney movies come in all sorts of types, and the easiest way to break down the type of Disney movie you are watching is through the various eras and sub-eras of Disney movies, that stretch from the very beginning in 1937 all the way to today. The eras that I’m looking at specifically have to do with the Disney Animated Features, as the entire Disney company has a much longer and extensive history with its own breakdowns of time periods.

We start with the Golden Era, which is all your classic movies from 1937 until about 1959. These were traditionally animated, hand drawn in cells, and tended to be big budget productions. The Golden Era, particularly in the early going, also featured many hit and miss features, at least initially. Snow Whitewas released to major critical and financial success, which led Walt Disney to see the future of the company in animated features.

Sleeping Beauty was one of Disney's crowning achievements in animation

Despite the wild success of Snow White, Disney’s next two features, Pinocchio and Fantasia, would struggle financially, and cut funding for future products. The next real success in terms of the box office would be Dumbo, which ran only 64 minutes due to the need for an economically efficient movie. After the war effort, with finances again low, Disney basically had everything riding on their 1950 film, Cinderella, which came through as a complete success and propelled the Disney company to go on and complete some of their best works. The Golden Era closed with Sleeping Beauty, which many consider to be Disney’s greatest visual masterpiece.

Within the Golden Era, there was the Wartime Era. The Wartime Era ran from 1942 through 1949. Due to many Disney animators participating in the war effort, supplies being low, and funds being lower, Disney had to resort to focusing on shorts and putting them together for theater releases as compilation films. These included the Latin American films Saludos Amigos and The Three Caballeros, as well as compilations such as Make Mine Music and Melody Time.

Mickey and the Beanstalk, featuring Mickey, Donald, and Goofy, helped Disney get one of their biggest box office smashes at the time

Within the Wartime Era, however, was 1947, which became Disney’s highest grossing year to date. Thanks to the wild success of Fun and Fancy Free, a film featuring the story of Bongo and Mickey and the Beanstalk, Disney started to get enough finances together to relaunch work on a full length feature, which led to the creation of Cinderella and the restart of the Golden Era.

Then there was the Silver Era, which began in 1961. The Silver Era was highlighted by Disney’s use of cheaper methods to make movies, in order to try and raise funds for the company. Different animation techniques, such as transferring artist’s drawings to cels via Xerox, cut costs and raised productivity.

In many ways, this era is arguably the most important in Disney’s history, as it finally alleviated many of the financial problems that the company faced, and set them up for the box office smashes of the future. This would also feature the last movie that Walt Disney had a personal hand in, with the Jungle Bookin 1967.

The Jungle Book was the last film Walt Disney had a hand in creating

What becomes tough is the next era, which some argue is part of the Silver Era, but others argue is a bit more of the Transitional Era, as it was just after Walt Disney died. During this time period, the focus from the Disney company was more on the opening of their biggest theme park venture, Walt Disney World, and many of their movies during this time period, such as The Black Cauldron, became a bit forgettable.

One major milestone to come out of this era though was with The Fox and the Hound, which featured a whole new generation of Disney animators. It would be this group who would go on to be a part of Disney’s greatest theatrical successes.

Next was the Disney Renaissance, which was the most successful point in Disney theatrical releases, both economically and critically. This time period started with The Little Mermaid in 1989, and lasted all the way until Tarzan in 1999. The Renaissance featured many of Disney’s most critically acclaimed movies, such as Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, and Aladdin.

Beauty and the Beast was the first animated film to be nominated for the Academy Award for Best Picture

This time period also featured a rebirth of the Disney musical, and Disney songs once again began to rack in awards as well as be entered into popular culture. Many people to this day still recall this period and these movies as some of the best that Disney has ever created.

The period after that has not exactly been defined yet, so most people just call it the “Modern Age” for now. Disney started to stray from the traditional musical at this point again, and after 2004’s Home on the Range, Disney had claimed that the age of traditionally animating their movies was over.

This proclamation would only last until 2009 however, as the Disney company had acquired Pixar in 2006, and with this, decided that there was still a place for non-CGI animated movies, such as The Princess and the Frog. Disney’s biggest success during this era so far as been Tangled, which was released in 2010.

Tangled has been one of Dsiney's most successful purely CGI films

Personally, my favorite era of Disney movies the Renaissance. Part of it is because it was going on during the time I grew up, but part of it is because I just feel it was the perfect blend of impressive animation, fun characters, strong storylines, and spectacular music.

But hey, that’s just my opinion, how about yours?

*Note: Disney: The First 100 Years by Dave Smith and Of Mice and Magic by Leonard Maltin used as sources.